Human vs chimp individuality: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Social Sciences » Human vs chimp individuality » Human vs chimp individuality

Page: 1 2 3

Human vs chimp individuality

TMB
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 14, 2007
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 296

Posted 07/03/08 - 03:35 PM: Subject: Human vs chimp individuality	#1
In the attached article an experiment was conducted using children and chimps. They found that children will blindly copy what they are taught while chimps will ony use what is pragmatic. Is this evidence for the lost individuality of humans? http://www.nature.com/nature/newsflash/chimpgenome/behaviour/3e.html

unenlightened
psychobabble

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 10, 2007
Location: Wales
Total Topics: 19
Total Posts: 1605

Posted 07/04/08 - 05:21 AM:	#2
There is a link towards the bottom of this thread that might interest you, about the structure of consciousness and self. I haven't fully absorbed it yet, but it seems to relate in that it talks of the brain emulating itself as a component of conscious awareness. Isn't it odd that we have the cliche 'Monkey see, monkey do." to characterise what turns out to be distinctively human behaviour?
The observer is the observed. J Krishnamurti "Philosophy, to the Philistine, is an evolutionary process, watched over by some sort of brisk dynamic Providence, and culminating in the supreme insight of modern thought." John Cowper Powys

Techeth
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 290

Posted 07/05/08 - 05:17 PM:	#3
I think human interaction is a key factor. Children live among adults who they see successfully navigating life, if they see something they copy because one, they are taught to do what they see or are told exactly, they get told off when they do things wrong so it is a skill to copy properly. And two they trust ad don't question adults, the monkeys don't have this connection. This is shown later on as the monkey that is raised by humans is more adept at copying them then the wild monkeys. The monkeys in this experiment have no reason to contemplate the reasoning of the human’s actions, they only serve their own goals, the child does not only serve its own goals it has reason to serve the rational of the adult. This is seemingly demonstrated amongst the monkeys as well as when given two options in achieving the same goal they follow the crowd.
Studying is like rowing against the current, if you are not moving forward, you are moving backward. - Chinese proverb Life's a bitch but God forbid the bitch divorce me! - Anon Silence makes the soul feel sick - Timid Timothy THINK QUICK! Your future just became your past.

TMB
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 14, 2007
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 296

Posted 07/05/08 - 06:18 PM:	#4
Thanks unenligtened, you said, There is a link towards the bottom of this thread that might interest you, about the structure of consciousness and self. I haven't fully absorbed it yet, but it seems to relate in that it talks of the brain emulating itself as a component of conscious awareness. Isn't it odd that we have the cliche 'Monkey see, monkey do." to characterise what turns out to be distinctively human behaviour? The article in the link has been very densely written, and I will need to spend time trying to unravel it, the concept sounds interesting. My interest in the chimp/children experiment was the readiness for the chimps to dispense with irrelevant tradition, while children even when recognising the emptines of certain tradition, still followed it. I interpret this as seeing that individual deference to the group overrides practical considerations and of course submerges individuality. A related phenomenon is that of "cargo cults", where primitive peoples will emulate the actions of those with advanced technologies in an attempt to get the same benefits. They do this while having no understanding of the actual mechanisms in play and there are curious examples where following WW2 in Asia Pacific, indigenous people built dummy airfields, control towers, wooden radios and headphones in the mistaken belief that the planes would return and drop valuable cargo of food and other goods. The difference between this and the chimp/children is that the children seem well aware that they are making empty gestures and do so in a blind copying of adults.

TMB
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 14, 2007
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 296

Posted 07/05/08 - 06:43 PM:	#5
Hi Techeth, you said, Children live among adults who they see successfully navigating life, if they see something they copy because one, they are taught to do what they see or are told exactly, they get told off when they do things wrong so it is a skill to copy properly. I am not sure what you mean by saying that adults successfully navigate life. There are plenty of adult behaviors we regard as dysfunctional and children emulate these. Are you suggesting that success is just surviving and should not be measured on how we consider bad and unacceptable behavior? In my experience children do not always do as they are told, yet with the experiment, the children followed faithfully even when the experimenter was not present. To me it seems more automated than just obedience because they are obedient. It seems like a mechanism to shut off any rational faculty as to what is practical in favor of following tradition, something lemmings do when they fall over cliffs. It is also at odds with the idea of free willed, rational individuals that gets strongly sold to us, perhaps in the same way as the chimp experiment. And two they trust ad don't question adults, the monkeys don't have this connection. I am not so sure this is that simple. Young people tend to rebel against authority, clearly defying adults and doing obviously unreasonable things. I think they blindly copy some model, either adults at early stages, and peers in adolesence. The same blind copying but with different role models and different outcomes. The monkeys in this experiment have no reason to contemplate the reasoning of the human’s actions, they only serve their own goals, the child does not only serve its own goals it has reason to serve the rational of the adult. I would say the chimps see the practical outcomes only and not blind conformamce. I would also imagine that the 'rational of the adult' is a fiction. Adult humans will be subject to the same copying behavior as children with some modifications and rationalisations. It might be rational to blindly copy, in that it could be the reason why humans have been able to form such large socities, while the other great apes are unable to operate in such large groups. This is seemingly demonstrated amongst the monkeys as well as when given two options in achieving the same goal they follow the crowd. Apes do seem to feel peer pressure, but not as acutely as we do. Its curios to note their ability to see what is practical and what is empty, choose the practical, but when offered a practical and socially ordained alternative, they defer to the group. Perhaps when our forebears began to follow blindly, something that allowed them to form large, stable and successful groups, they were at the same stage as apes are at today?

Techeth
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 290

Posted 07/06/08 - 03:09 AM:	#6
TMB wrote: Hi Techeth, you said, I am not sure what you mean by saying that adults successfully navigate life. There are plenty of adult behaviors we regard as dysfunctional and children emulate these. Are you suggesting that success is just surviving and should not be measured on how we consider bad and unacceptable behavior? In my experience children do not always do as they are told, yet with the experiment, the children followed faithfully even when the experimenter was not present. To me it seems more automated than just obedience because they are obedient. It seems like a mechanism to shut off any rational faculty as to what is practical in favor of following tradition, something lemmings do when they fall over cliffs. It is also at odds with the idea of free willed, rational individuals that gets strongly sold to us, perhaps in the same way as the chimp experiment. Yes but most children at that age are not critically aware of the failings they are emulating. Whether or not the adult is navigating life successfully is irrelevant, as far as the child is concerned something is happening, so they do as they are told. Maybe navigating life is the wrong term as the child isn't quite so critical of its surroundings, but they are aware of greater complexities in life that the monkey is not, like child proof bottles. My point is the child is aware of the presence of obedience, the monkey is not. The monkey is only being shown how to get the food this is the driving force and rightly so. For the child they are aware of the adults demonstration, they are not solely driven my food, so they have no reason not to copy, whether the experimenter is in the room or not. This as you say is not the most practical approach but it is one which suits the environment they live in. They need not concern themselves with such practical thoughts, as their food, clothes and shelter even their survival is provided for them, survival is not dependant on success. TMB wrote: I am not so sure this is that simple. Young people tend to rebel against authority, clearly defying adults and doing obviously unreasonable things. I think they blindly copy some model, either adults at early stages, and peers in adolesence. The same blind copying but with different role models and different outcomes. Yes but not so much over the short term when they are getting what they want, the children are getting the sweet, as well as being in a foreign environment, you may find after a day or two they have no interest in it at all. TMB wrote: I would say the chimps see the practical outcomes only and not blind conformamce. I would also imagine that the 'rational of the adult' is a fiction. Adult humans will be subject to the same copying behavior as children with some modifications and rationalisations. It might be rational to blindly copy, in that it could be the reason why humans have been able to form such large socities, while the other great apes are unable to operate in such large groups. I would agree for the most part but all I mean by 'rational of the adult' is that the child is aware that the thinking of the adult is relevant where as the monkey is not in the same sense. The monkey does not have the same connection with cognitive thinking that makes it aware of more than just physical outcomes and actions. TMB wrote: Apes do seem to feel peer pressure, but not as acutely as we do. Its curios to note their ability to see what is practical and what is empty, choose the practical, but when offered a practical and socially ordained alternative, they defer to the group. Perhaps when our forebears began to follow blindly, something that allowed them to form large, stable and successful groups, they were at the same stage as apes are at today? This may very well be the case such thinking would have been required. I actually saw an interesting experiment recently where children of around this age were given something, say a box with a red button on it and were told not to press the red button. The box was left on the table and the experimenter left, reminding them they"must not press the red button, whatever they do". Now all alone in the room (1 or 2 children) it was a matter of time before (I believe, if not the vast majority) every child pressed the red button. They could not resist. They didn't know what was in it or the consequences of opening it but they did it regardless. The experimenter suggested it was the fact they were told not to that they did, and this is something that stays with us through adulthood. So it is clearly more complicated than blind obedience, or tradition, and I wonder how long such dangerous impulses have driven us.
Studying is like rowing against the current, if you are not moving forward, you are moving backward. - Chinese proverb Life's a bitch but God forbid the bitch divorce me! - Anon Silence makes the soul feel sick - Timid Timothy THINK QUICK! Your future just became your past.

TMB
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 14, 2007
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 296

Posted 07/07/08 - 04:03 AM:	#7
Hi Techteth, you said, Maybe navigating life is the wrong term as the child isn't quite so critical of its surroundings, but they are aware of greater complexities in life that the monkey is not, like child proof bottles. Why do you consider chimps to be less aware of complexities than children? Because they can see that blindly copying behavior is required as much as the 'food' based objective of the exercise, while chimps either ignore or cannot see the social conformity aspect? My point is the child is aware of the presence of obedience, the monkey is not. I do not think this aspect was specifically tested, however animals lower than chimps, like dogs, are well aware of obedience, as are whales and dolphins, so I am guessing chimps are also. The monkey is only being shown how to get the food this is the driving force and rightly so. For the child they are aware of the adults demonstration, they are not solely driven my food, so they have no reason not to copy, whether the experimenter is in the room or not. In what way do you mean the children are driven and have no reason 'not to copy' Is it not more likely that they have reason 'to copy'? This as you say is not the most practical approach but it is one which suits the environment they live in. They need not concern themselves with such practical thoughts, as their food, clothes and shelter even their survival is provided for them, survival is not dependant on success. You have said that children do not need top occupy themselves with food etc, however children behavior is certainly driven by this. Crying is desgned to trigger parental response, and usually successful in getting a milk bottle etc to quiet them. Baby chimps also get the same deal but it does not last as long as they become independent earlier than humans. What exactly do you mean that survival is no dependent on success? What exactly do you think measures success in this scenario? Yes but not so much over the short term when they are getting what they want, the children are getting the sweet, as well as being in a foreign environment, you may find after a day or two they have no interest in it at all. Are you saying that the tendency to copy without question is temporary in children? There appear to be plenty of examples where blindly copying others continues throughout life. I recall a story where a woman used to make a particular food dish and used to clip the corners of the meat. When asked why, she said that her mother had always done it this way. So they asked the mother, who said her mother had also done it this way. They asked the grandmother who said she had always cut the meat to fit into her small pan. I would agree for the most part but all I mean by 'rational of the adult' is that the child is aware that the thinking of the adult is relevant where as the monkey is not in the same sense. The monkey does not have the same connection with cognitive thinking that makes it aware of more than just physical outcomes and actions. Why do you think the child is aware of the thinking of the adult, and does not just operate like an automaton? You appear to be giving the child a level of awareness that is not indicated in the experiment. Once again, I think that chimps have sufficient social awareness to understand some level of social interaction, similar to a child, and I am not sure that it is social awareness that is driving the child. I would see it as being closer to the same blind instincts that lower animals show when they perform the same behavior as adults. Example is otters who can be raised without exposure to water or fish, yet when taken to a river will swim, catch and eat fish with no need to learn. A baboon, on the other hand, has to be taught what to eat and how to do so (as do humans). I get the sense that the child is not so much being obedient, as copying without question. Its possible that something is being missed when comparing children with adult chimps. I actually saw an interesting experiment recently where children of around this age were given something, say a box with a red button on it and were told not to press the red button. The box was left on the table and the experimenter left, reminding them they"must not press the red button, whatever they do". Now all alone in the room (1 or 2 children) it was a matter of time before (I believe, if not the vast majority) every child pressed the red button. They could not resist. They didn't know what was in it or the consequences of opening it but they did it regardless. The experimenter suggested it was the fact they were told not to that they did, and this is something that stays with us through adulthood. So it is clearly more complicated than blind obedience, or tradition, and I wonder how long such dangerous impulses have driven us. I am not sure that a simple, direct comparison is possible. In both cases they were given directions on an activity, one to do and the other not to do. In both cases they were unable to fall into that activity. This is why I do not see this as a measure of obedience as much as some kind of blind programming based upon a piece of information given. It seems almost as if it is just the instruction that is what sticks in the mind, regardless of what they are being told to do with it. This seems to provide more evidence for blindly copying some piece of information. If the instruction was to either press the red button, or not to press the red button, the operater seems o be the pushing of the red button. No discretion, no obedience is applied, just some form of blind programming to the action.

Techeth
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 290

Posted 07/08/08 - 05:41 AM:	#8
TMB wrote: Why do you consider chimps to be less aware of complexities than children? Because they can see that blindly copying behavior is required as much as the 'food' based objective of the exercise, while chimps either ignore or cannot see the social conformity aspect? What I mean is the child is aware more so than the monkey that there are complicated mechanism which require a process to work, they have experience at trying things and seeing they don’t work, when shown something that works in the short term they have no reason not to continue to copy. TMB wrote: I do not think this aspect was specifically tested, however animals lower than chimps, like dogs, are well aware of obedience, as are whales and dolphins, so I am guessing chimps are also. For the child the importance of obedience is greater than for the monkey, the child will be concerned with technically copying the monkey is concerned with the outcome. TMB wrote: In what way do you mean the children are driven and have no reason 'not to copy' Is it not more likely that they have reason 'to copy'? Yes the children have a reason to copy but they also have no reason not to copy, where as the monkey does, the monkey is driven by the food once it is presented. Only if the adult was to stop it from getting the treat would it use the top hole first, where as the child does not have the same compulsive instinct to get the food, the child’s job is to copy, the treat is a by-product. If the treat was then taken away, the child may then choose to look solely for the treat. TMB wrote: You have said that children do not need top occupy themselves with food etc, however children behavior is certainly driven by this. Crying is desgned to trigger parental response, and usually successful in getting a milk bottle etc to quiet them. Baby chimps also get the same deal but it does not last as long as they become independent earlier than humans. What exactly do you mean that survival is no dependent on success? What exactly do you think measures success in this scenario? I agree, I mean the success of the task. The success of the task for the monkey would demonstrate good survival skills, as you say this is not case for a child as crying is it most useful tool. TMB wrote: Are you saying that the tendency to copy without question is temporary in children? There appear to be plenty of examples where blindly copying others continues throughout life. I recall a story where a woman used to make a particular food dish and used to clip the corners of the meat. When asked why, she said that her mother had always done it this way. So they asked the mother, who said her mother had also done it this way. They asked the grandmother who said she had always cut the meat to fit into her small pan. Well as I am sure you agree if we questioned things every time we were shown something we would not get very far very quickly, but for the most part yes that is what I am saying, especially when the practicality is so obvious. I am sure the women in your example at some point questioned the idea, but just left it at tradition or style, they may even have speculated reasons such as this isn't the best part of the meat, which is I'm sure how a lot of myths and traditions are born, when people ask why. The children are the early stages of this, not knowing the answer is no reason not to do it, it may very well be the questioning that keeps them doing it (as adults). TMB wrote: Why do you think the child is aware of the thinking of the adult, and does not just operate like an automaton? You appear to be giving the child a level of awareness that is not indicated in the experiment. Once again, I think that chimps have sufficient social awareness to understand some level of social interaction, similar to a child, and I am not sure that it is social awareness that is driving the child. I would see it as being closer to the same blind instincts that lower animals show when they perform the same behavior as adults. Example is otters who can be raised without exposure to water or fish, yet when taken to a river will swim, catch and eat fish with no need to learn. A baboon, on the other hand, has to be taught what to eat and how to do so (as do humans). I get the sense that the child is not so much being obedient, as copying without question. Its possible that something is being missed when comparing children with adult chimps. Well very little is expressed by the experiment but I would suggest the children do have a greater awareness even if only through experience, but yes they are just copying. In the same way the monkey that was raised by humans was more likely to copy the same is true for the child. They have greater experience of doing what they are told. In doing so the child has experience of thinking which is not obviously in line with practicality. We have seen with feral children that if they are left with animals they copy and become like the animals, I would say that evolution has guided the child towards copying and relatively less practical thinking as it better suits the support mechanism provided. I would think the mind of the child has begun to process more in this regard than the monkey. There was an experiment where a man brought a monkey into his family to see if it could learn to be like a human. It turned out that his son, only a toddler, began to copy the monkey and the experiment was abandoned. It would seem it is more practical for the child to be able to copy effectively, and as is demonstrated by their ability to learn to survive emulating many creature. 'Automaton' seems to undermine the value of this survival instinct. TMB wrote: I am not sure that a simple, direct comparison is possible. In both cases they were given directions on an activity, one to do and the other not to do. In both cases they were unable to fall into that activity. This is why I do not see this as a measure of obedience as much as some kind of blind programming based upon a piece of information given. It seems almost as if it is just the instruction that is what sticks in the mind, regardless of what they are being told to do with it. This seems to provide more evidence for blindly copying some piece of information. If the instruction was to either press the red button, or not to press the red button, the operater seems o be the pushing of the red button. No discretion, no obedience is applied, just some form of blind programming to the action. Okay but what's the difference between obedience and blindly doing what you are told because you are programmed to do so?
Studying is like rowing against the current, if you are not moving forward, you are moving backward. - Chinese proverb Life's a bitch but God forbid the bitch divorce me! - Anon Silence makes the soul feel sick - Timid Timothy THINK QUICK! Your future just became your past.

TMB
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 14, 2007
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 296

Posted 07/09/08 - 04:29 PM:	#9
Tehteth, you said, What I mean is the child is aware more so than the monkey that there are complicated mechanism which require a process to work, they have experience at trying things and seeing they don’t work, when shown something that works in the short term they have no reason not to continue to copy. How do you know this fact about chimps and children. It seem intuitive to consider young humans to have a better understanding than chimps, but does the evidence bear this out? I did not get the impression from the tests that complexity of task was a factor. For the child the importance of obedience is greater than for the monkey, the child will be concerned with technically copying the monkey is concerned with the outcome. We agree on this one. Once again I am not sure it is even a simple as obedience, more an automated reaction. Yes the children have a reason to copy but they also have no reason not to copy, where as the monkey does, the monkey is driven by the food once it is presented. Not sure what you are saying here. Why do children have a reason not to copy. I see a causative process at play here. with little choice available to the child. It appeasr the chimp is making a choice while the chil is not. The chimp can copy faithfully or take the shortcut, the children appear to only have the copy option. Only if the adult was to stop it from getting the treat would it use the top hole first, where as the child does not have the same compulsive instinct to get the food, the child’s job is to copy, the treat is a by-product. If the treat was then taken away, the child may then choose to look solely for the treat. I am not clear on this. What makes you think the child is not looking for the treat as the reward for doing this? What awas presented that shows chldren do not have compulsive instincts for food. Perhaps you have never taken young children into sweet shops as I have and seen their compulsions first hand. I think the faithful copy action is incidental to their drive for the reward, not the other way around. I agree, I mean the success of the task. The success of the task for the monkey would demonstrate good survival skills, as you say this is not case for a child as crying is it most useful tool. Is there evidence for crying to be the most successful tool for children. I do not think at the age tested there was any crying, other compulsions come into play as they get older and they are prepared to do what it takes to get the reward. In groups of other children, crying certainly happens and alerts adults, but it does not motivate their peers to help them out, so they need to have other means of getting what they want. Well as I am sure you agree if we questioned things every time we were shown something we would not get very far very quickly, but for the most part yes that is what I am saying, especially when the practicality is so obvious. If we did question, we might also have a better chance of getting the right answer, but that might not be the social answer. If we questioned the idea of a flat earth instead of accepting it without question, we might have ben further head than we are today. I would modify your comment to say, that if we question things every time, we will stunt our social growth. I am sure the women in your example at some point questioned the idea, but just left it at tradition or style, they may even have speculated reasons such as this isn't the best part of the meat, which is I'm sure how a lot of myths and traditions are born, when people ask why. The children are the early stages of this, not knowing the answer is no reason not to do it, it may very well be the questioning that keeps them doing it (as adults). I think that most people do not question why. I have tested people on clothing and cosmetic fashion sense and very soon you can see they have no real idea why they wear certain items of clothes, or cosmetics, except because everyone else does. When you finally suggest the possibility that they blindly copy others, this is resisted, as we have also been taught that we are individual, free willed beings that do not copy blindly (and this is another example of blindy copying in itself). We have seen with feral children that if they are left with animals they copy and become like the animals, I would say that evolution has guided the child towards copying and relatively less practical thinking as it better suits the support mechanism provided. I would think the mind of the child has begun to process more in this regard than the monkey. I agre with this. It seems that we have evolved a socially supported blindly copy mechanism that alows us to form quite stable and large groups, chimps cannot do the same. They are unable to conform quite as well as we do. There was an experiment where a man brought a monkey into his family to see if it could learn to be like a human. It turned out that his son, only a toddler, began to copy the monkey and the experiment was abandoned. It would seem it is more practical for the child to be able to copy effectively, and as is demonstrated by their ability to learn to survive emulating many creature. 'Automaton' seems to undermine the value of this survival instinct. For humans survival is more about fitting in with the crowd. If you alienate your group, you are unlikely to survive. However, its possible that our groups have beome so large that we can become faceless and not copying inside a NewYork, and violate the norms and still get away with it to some degree. Okay but what's the difference between obedience and blindly doing what you are told because you are programmed to do so? It might be semantics, but for me obedience is an active choice, while blind copying is an automated response, much like you would get if you mixed two chemicals. Obedience requires some form of awareness and choice. Our belief in a flat earth did not appear to be made as obedience, something we reviewed and consciously decided to obey, it was just somethiing we believed because that was what everyone believed.

Techeth
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 290

Posted 07/10/08 - 06:20 AM:	#10
TMB wrote: Tehteth, you said, How do you know this fact about chimps and children. It seem intuitive to consider young humans to have a better understanding than chimps, but does the evidence bear this out? I did not get the impression from the tests that complexity of task was a factor. Yes but I am simply considering experience as a factor, the experiment was very limited in what it showed as it was not testing the apes and the children, it was testing the apes and this was one stage of the testing. I don't know but I am suggesting that the child's experience with being unable to opperate things within its surroundings and being shown, there is no reason to think the child would think for itself when being shown. I would agree this is where the child would be somewhat automatous, I just think it understandable. TMB wrote: We agree on this one. Once again I am not sure it is even a simple as obedience, more an automated reaction. I think we are in some agreement with this, I will discuss the semantics later on. TMB wrote: Not sure what you are saying here. Why do children have a reason not to copy. I see a causative process at play here. with little choice available to the child. It appeasr the chimp is making a choice while the chil is not. The chimp can copy faithfully or take the shortcut, the children appear to only have the copy option. I said the child has no reason not to copy TMB wrote: I am not clear on this. What makes you think the child is not looking for the treat as the reward for doing this? What awas presented that shows chldren do not have compulsive instincts for food. Perhaps you have never taken young children into sweet shops as I have and seen their compulsions first hand. I think the faithful copy action is incidental to their drive for the reward, not the other way around. Yes it is but for the monkey it is a matter of survival for the child it is not, the child is not yet learning to survive on its own it is entirely dependant on the parents. The child wants the sweet and continues to copy becuase it is a byproduct of doing so. The child is shown what to do first then it recieves the treat, this would not be the first time it has experienced such instruction. The monkey however is only concerned with the food, it's in-bread instructions are to find food to survive it has no time for ceremony, thus logical practical thinking, just as the child seems to have inbread instruction to copy to survive. TMB wrote: Is there evidence for crying to be the most successful tool for children. I do not think at the age tested there was any crying, other compulsions come into play as they get older and they are prepared to do what it takes to get the reward. In groups of other children, crying certainly happens and alerts adults, but it does not motivate their peers to help them out, so they need to have other means of getting what they want. I'm not suggesting in this circumstance there was, just making the point that the children are still very dependant if they could not get the treat as you've mentioned there would have been a few tears. TMB wrote: If we did question, we might also have a better chance of getting the right answer, but that might not be the social answer. If we questioned the idea of a flat earth instead of accepting it without question, we might have ben further head than we are today. I would modify your comment to say, that if we question things every time, we will stunt our social growth. That is what I said. TMB wrote: I think that most people do not question why. I have tested people on clothing and cosmetic fashion sense and very soon you can see they have no real idea why they wear certain items of clothes, or cosmetics, except because everyone else does. When you finally suggest the possibility that they blindly copy others, this is resisted, as we have also been taught that we are individual, free willed beings that do not copy blindly (and this is another example of blindy copying in itself). I am sure people do question why, they may just have superficial answers, and not question very deeply but I'm sure it happens. I would say that we are individuals that do copy blinly. After all we did discover the world was not flat. TMB wrote: For humans survival is more about fitting in with the crowd. If you alienate your group, you are unlikely to survive. However, its possible that our groups have beome so large that we can become faceless and not copying inside a NewYork, and violate the norms and still get away with it to some degree. I think this is true for a lot of animals that live in groups they are not overly fond of alien behaviour, as shown the monkeys would all conform to a set method when having options. I think the ability to alienate your group and survive is greatest among humans. TMB wrote: It might be semantics, but for me obedience is an active choice, while blind copying is an automated response, much like you would get if you mixed two chemicals. Obedience requires some form of awareness and choice. Our belief in a flat earth did not appear to be made as obedience, something we reviewed and consciously decided to obey, it was just somethiing we believed because that was what everyone believed. But we know the children have a choice because when they are told not to do something they often will do it. And when we discovered the world was not flat is was not an accident, it was sought and not by one man, he was not the only person to believe this. I think our blind belief in things is as a response to our lack of need to think for ourselves as we grow up, while those who can excel within their communities. We have a blind faith in authority, and we make an effort to copy it, it is not something that occurs naturally. You visit any school and the kids are aware of who fits in and who doesn't and they will all have ideas as to why.
Studying is like rowing against the current, if you are not moving forward, you are moving backward. - Chinese proverb Life's a bitch but God forbid the bitch divorce me! - Anon Silence makes the soul feel sick - Timid Timothy THINK QUICK! Your future just became your past.

Page: 1 2 3

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.